If you're random Joe Schmoe who happens to need a database, I don't expect you to contribute. But when you're of the largest tech firms in the world...

Is kill -11 even allowed?

On the other hand, the OOM killer is worst of all: "kill process or sacrifice child."

If you used regular filesystem moves, p4 may have registered them as separate deletes and adds. Depending on workspace configuration, Perforce may not propagate deletes from the depot, so old copies might be left behind. Always move files in a workspace using P4V, your Perforce plugin, or the p4 mv command to ensure file continuity. If done properly, this will appear as add/move and delete/move.

But if things aren't showing up in new places, it's likely you referred some things you didn't mean to or didn't commit everything. Check to see if you still have anything checked out. Also worth noting that empty directories don't exist as far as Perforce is concerned.

For the benefit of anyone reading this later, the function to check end-of-file should be feof, not foef.

It actually makes some sort of weird sense if you can get past the inconsistent labeling. Since it's a daycare, each option is probably an enrollment period, and they are arranged in reverse chronological order. Still weird, but perhaps not as outrageous as it initially appears.

I know this will come as a shock to a lot of people, but a lot of software doesn't do CI/CD. Especially CD. Basically only webapps can do CD, although Dropbox is close with weekly releases. A lot of enterprise and industry software still does quarterly or even semiannual releases. Hospitals, banks, and government agencies in particular have stringent vetting procedures that mean they can spend months verifying and approving a new major version before upgrading, so there's no point throwing one at them every couple weeks.

Just what we've been waiting for!

Nonsense. The compiler can handle type-checking far more quickly and acurately than any code reviewer. When I review code, I want to look at code structure, algorithms, data structures, interface design, contracts, logic, and style.

I don't want to go through your code line by line cross-referencing every function call to make sure you put the arguments in the right order and checking every member access for typos. That's a waste of my time, and by extension, the company's money.

That's a great point. In any sort of enterprise system, you should be unit-testing your front end when you commit, and you should be UI-testing your front end before you deploy. If you're in a CI/CD pipeline, that normally happens right after the build step. If you need to have the pipeline running anyways, you might as well build.

I'm on Hover. They'll host and email inbox for you, but not a website.

Not quite sure what you're looking for, but I think Dreamhost can just hand you an Ubuntu box you can SSH or SFTP to to manage your site.

NEMA has called them "plugs" and "receptacles" for decades.

You forgot "don't say 'thank you for pointing out that we were sending social security numbers to everyone who visits our website that anybody could stumble across,' but rather 'you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, hacker!'" Courtesy of the Missouri Department of Education.

Probably for the best.

I got news for you. If you're not a citizen of the country you're located in and you don't have a work visa for that country, you're probably working illegally, whether or not your employer realizes. (Some exceptions for EU citizens, Canada, etc.)

Re: too lazy for Let's Encrypt, a) last I used LE (for my personal site), your site had to be publicly available on the Internet so that you could prove you controlled the site. Most test servers are not public. and b) many (most?) companies would throw a fit if you started generating your own certificates for their domains.

But there are always solutions. I was able to talk my company into getting properly signed certs for our test servers.

I'm not sure I want my banking apps to store anything on my phone in the first place. But maybe that's just me. I don't even use banking apps.

If you use JavaScript, you've probably seen a monad, since Promise is a monad. Unit is Promise.resolve(), bind is Promise.then(). As required, Promise.resolve(x).then(y) === y(x) (unit forms a left identity of bind), y.then(Promise.resolve) === y (unit forms a right identity of bind), and x.then(y.then(z)) === x.then(y).then(z) (bind is essentially associative).

You even have the equivalent of Haskell's fancy do-notation (a form of syntactic sugar to save writing unit and bind all over the place) in the form of async/await. It's just not generalized the way it is in Haskell.

Rather than messing with the EventListener, wouldn't it be easier to just throttle the function that it calls? You can find a bunch of articles online that will explain how to implement a throttle (and also a debouncer, which is similar, but not quite what you're looking for; a throttle allows a function to be called immediately unless it's already been called too recently, while a debouncer waits every time before calling the function and restarts the wait timer every time someone tried to call the function).